Transcript Diapositiva 1

How to start a successful proposal
under FP7?
A step-by-step methodology
towards success
Introduction
• The submission of comprehensive and competitive
high quality proposals in FP7 is more than ever a
necessity for being selected for a grant agreement
– Facts: In the Call 3 in the “ICT Objectives Intelligent
Content and Semantics and Technology enhanced
Learning“ the acceptance rate was 5% (from 252 only 13
have been accepted, 240/12)
• Writing a proposal for an FP7 project is a serious
task
– Methodology for project design and proposal writing is
needed
Introduction
• The aim of this presentation is
– to share experience about writing professional and
competitive proposals for the FP7
• the common problems in proposal writing
• the success criteria for proposals
– to provide tips on
• how to collect information
• how to select strategic partners
• how to avoid duplication in proposal writing
– to present a strategy/methodology for proposal
writing
Understanding how FP7 works
• You can apply for FP7 funds by submitting a
proposal following a call published by the
European Commision
– Within FP7 you find different programmes and
some of them follow different rules
• Knowing and understanding these rules is key
– Do not hesitate to ask e.g. NCP to explain FP7 to
you
• Austrian case: FIT example
• New countries case: SAKE project
FP7 Structure - Summary
Co-operation
Capacities
Health
Research Infrastructures
Food, Agriculture and Biotechnology
Information and
and Communication
Communication Technologies
Technologies
Information
Research for the Benefit
Of SMEs
Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and new Production
Technologies
Regions of Knowledge
Energy
Research Potential
Environment (including Climate Change)
Science in Society
Transport
Activities of International
Co-operation
Socio-Economic Sciences and the Humanities
Security and Space
FP7
Ideas – European Research Council (ERC)
Starting Independent Researcher Grants
Advanced Investigator Grants
Coherent Development
of Policies
People – Marie Curie
Initial Training of Researchers
Lifelong Learning and Career Development
Industry-Academia Partnerships and Pathways
The International Dimension
Specific Actions
Funding Schemes FP6 – FP7
IP
FP7 – Co-operation
STREP
NoE
CA
Collaborative
Projects
Networks of
Excellence
Coordination and
Support actions
SSA
FP6
Instruments
FP7
Funding Schemes
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Basics of writing proposals
Methodology
Conclusion
What is needed for sucessful
proposal?
• Excellent idea
– Clearly in the scope of a published Objective
– Clearly within the scope of required instrument
– Work that advances the state of the art/Clear technological risk
• Excellent team
– Best partners, that are well known in Europe
– Partners who fit perfectly to accomplish the tasks
– Clear need for collaboration
• Great Impact
– Project with large potential impact (Current Generation
Technology plus two)
– Clear benefits for certain European constituencies
• Well-written proposal
– Clear language
– Well-organised content
R&D Proposals Unsuitable for FP7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Where only seeking funding source
Something that needs to start now
Does not clearly advance the state of the art
Product development/lower risk (Current
Generation Technology plus one)
Lacks clear market or strategic impact
Anything outside ICT scope
Anything that is extremely secret
Where you don’t need to collaborate
Where you could do all the work in-house
Taken from: http://www.caast-net.org/xwiki/bin/download/Main/document+library/TheEuropeanUnionsICTProgrammeinFP7.pdf
Writing successful proposals needs time
and resources
• Starting on time (ASAP)
– The Ideal-ist project conducted a survey early 2003
among IP coordinators and found that 2/3s of
consortia had been basically formed prior to the first
call being issued. Although they could accept
additional partners after that, the core team had
already formed
• Planning resources properly
– When preparing a proposal as coordinator you need
to expect to spend 2 man months work at least and
significant travelling
– As Work Package leader you should expect to spend
1 man month preparation time including travel costs
and time
Proposal Time-line
Taken from: www.efpconsulting.com/tools (Mr. M. Morron’s FP7 Book)
Examples
• FP6: FIT project
– FIT was 1st in the ranking
– Time plan:
• The initial idea which was presented to the POs of the eGovernment Unit was created in November 2004
• It was finished 10 days before deadline
• It was submitted on 22/03/2005
• FP7 Call 5 (not opened yet): new proposal
– The initial idea is ready
– Project idea communicated to the POs who we know
from past or running projects
– Meeting is already scheduled
• 3 pages document explaining the importance of proposal,
main contributions and potential partners is submitted
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Basics of writing proposals
Methodology
Conclusion
PcM: Proposal creation Methodology
(for research projects)
- at the glance -
Own research (results)
Industry needs
Market analyses (e.g. Gartner)
Iniciator
European Commission
(e.g. cluster meetings)
Incubation
phase
IDEA
Core team
Process
Consortium
Coordinator
Writting
phase
EC web page
(e.g. services,
official documents)
Negotiation
phase
Checking
phase
Submission
PROPOSAL phase
Collaboration
Collaborative tools
(e.g. Wiki)
©iCEP FZI
Incubation phase
• Goal: Creating an interesting and relevant idea
and building a core team for the proposal
• There is always an initiator
• Questions that should be answered:
– What: Uniqueness
– Why: Importance
– Who: Core team
How to create an idea?
• Every published call is accompanied by important
documents
– Download Work Programmes, Guide for Participants and
more legal documents of the Cordis pages
• Analysis of the calls for proposals and work
programmes
– Reactive: Adapting own ideas to existing WP
– Proactive: Proposing own ideas for WP
– Find good arguments why your project is important
• It is not always obvious what they are actually looking
for, especially to newcomers
– Some Units publish on their web site an expanded version
of their section of the Workprogram or other background
documents
How to create an idea?
Objective ICT-2009.1.3: Internet of Things and Enterprise environments
Target outcomes
b) Future Internet based Enterprise Systems
- Software platforms supporting highly innovative networked businesses on top
of an Internet of Services. These platforms should enable increased flexibility of
the resources managed by virtual organizations and facilitate dynamic outsourcing
with third parties capability to aggregate services, act as intermediaries for delivery,
and provide innovative new channels for consumption. Collaboration and
interoperability are key features of these dynamic ecosystems supported by next
generation knowledge management services, making use of semantically enriched
information, including object/sensor information.
Reactive: Adapting own ideas to existing WP
• The first step for potential participants is to
examine the Workprogramm and identify
which specific Objectives are of potential
interest and which topic within
– Methodology on how to read and decode the calls
for proposals
to understand the EC’s expectations
Objective ICT-2009.1.3: Internet of Things and Enterprise environments
outcomes the lines
• ReadTarget
between
b) Future Internet based Enterprise Systems
• Underline keywords
• You should also know as soon as possible
which type of project would be most
appropriate
Funding schemes
a), b): IP, STREP; c): CSA
Indicative budget distribution9
- IP/STREP: EUR 35 million; the objective is to support at least 2 IPs
- CSA: EUR 2 million
Call
ICT call 5
How to create an idea?
Proactive: Proposing own ideas for WP
• Be active in identification of research topics
for next calls
– Contribute to public calls for ideas for
Workprogramm
– Comment draft Workprogramm
– Participate in Consultation meetings
How to create an impactful idea?
• Find good arguments why your project is
important in:
– policy documents
– statistics in OECD studies
– strategic research agendas (e.g. Garnter, Forrester,
etc.)
– visions published by Technology Platforms
• Provide a framework for stakeholders, led by industry, to
define research and development priorities, timeframes and
action plans on a number of strategically important issues
where achieving Europe's future growth, competitiveness
and sustainability objectives is dependent upon major
research and technological advances in the medium to long
term
Best practices – FIT project
E-government Hype Cycle, Source: Gartner Research
(February 2004)
Semantic technologies & e-government:
a) Semantic Technology Horizontal Markets to 2010;
b) Semantic Technology Vertical Markets to 2010 ($US Billions).
Source: TopQuadrant
How to create an unique idea?
• Often themes called and described in the work
programme have a history of previous projects
• Study what has been done before and by whom
– Find these on Cordis and study who participated
• You might find partners for your project and learn about possible
competitors for your proposal
– Visit collaboration events
• To achieve a better understanding of the FP6 & FP7 projects in the
target area
• To see key outcomes of FP6 & FP7 projects through posters and
demonstrations
• To understand the work of the running collaboration working
groups allowing feedback and planning for the future
• To facilitate networking and discussion following call
Examples
• Collaboration Meeting
– Internet of Services 2009, 10-11 June 2009
– All representatives of FP6 and FP7 projects in the
area of Software & Services, Grid and Software
and Service Architectures and Infrastructures are
invited to participate
• Demos to demonstrate concrete project results
• Collaboration working groups
How to create an unique and impactful idea?
Visit information events
• The Commission organizes public information events on calls
– Call 5, objective 4.3: Intelligent Information Management, 11-12 May
2009 in Luxemburg
– Call 5, objective 1.2: Internet of Services, Software and Virtualisation,
9th of June 2009, Brussels
• These events aim at helping participants
– to better understand the work programme and success criteria for
proposals
– to facilitate sharing of ideas and experiences
– to find partners for project consortia
• There you get the chance to discuss with Scientific Officers from the
Commission
• You might meet potential partners and competing groups
• There are poster panels and matchmaking sessions where you can
publish information about your expertise
Best practices
• FP7 Synergy Project:
– At the Information Day, we read a flyer of one
proposal and found its idea very promising
– We contacted the key person at the event by
suggesting how to improve the idea by offering our
expertise
– We invited him for one-day meeting to further discuss
the idea
– We decided to write a join proposal
• He profited from our experiences in FP projects and new
ideas
• We profited from his knowledge in the target area and his
“visibility” in the unit
Core team
• Core team drives the idea creation process and
proposal writing
• Usually consists of 2 -4 partners who share the
same vision about the proposal (or at least have a
common agreement about it)
• Ideally, at least one partner from
– Academy – to guarantee research excellence
• Experience in research projects is very welcomed
– Industry – to guarantee the impact of the idea
• Support of big players is welcomed
– SAP, IBM, Thales, etc.
How to build the core team?
• In general case the idea about a proposal emerges from
previous discussions of two partners that they “could do
something together”
• They try to complete the core team in two ways:
– Partner-driven
• Include known partners in the proposal
– Negative: Difficult because of needed expertise
– Positive: You know what you can expect
– Topic-driven
–
–
–
–
–
Find expert for the topics of the proposal
Look at the existing projects
Search for program committee members of conferences in the target area
Find authors of most important papers
Ask friends
Output of the incubation phase
• Core team writes an initial draft of the
proposal
– 2-3 pages
– draft contains basic information about the
proposal:
•
•
•
•
•
Vision
Relevance to the Call
Objectives (research challenges)
Basic conceptual architecture
Skill matrix
Output of the incubation phase
• Proposal clinics
– EC representatives are available to discuss project
ideas (e.g. Information Days)
– They offer preliminary feedback on proposal
relevance with respect to the workprogramme
and call for proposals
Negotiation phase
• Goal: to synchronize work between partners
• This phase should ensure
– stable and completed consortium
– further development of the research challenges
and basic conceptual architecture (draft proposal)
– nice working atmosphere
• It is driven by core team
Building a consortium
• The core team attracts partners to join him in
participating in a proposal
– A good consortium is a key factor for success
– Build your consortium early but carefully
• Potential partners should be well informed
– draft proposal can be sent (note: it must be confidential)
– a conflict of business interests should be avoided
• Partners should not be privately competing in a parallel
proposal
– Each partner should sign a non-competitive non-disclosure
agreement
Characteristics of a well-formed
consortium (I)
• Number of partners is optimal
– The minimal requirement is determined by the Call
• E.g. for most R & D proposals there must be a minimum
of three partners from three member or associated
states
 However, not too less and not too many partners
 Less means some partners cover too much expertises
 Many means that there is too much redundancy in expertises
 The consortium should be “as large as is required and can
be justified to carry out the work and commensurate with
the expected impact”
Characteristics of a well-formed
consortium (II)
 Expertise of partners is well-balanced
 All required competences/skills/expertise are covered and
there is no large redundancy in expertise
 each partner plays a corresponding ROLE in the
consortium
 Geographical distribution
 Not only between EU countries, Associated Countries, etc.,
but rather within these groups
 Important for budget per country
Partners - expertise
• The consortium should have significant experience in
project relevant areas
• All partners bring into the project a different focus of work
and a different perspective of emphasis
• The consortium should be selected for the diverse and
complementary expertise and skills that the partners
collectively bring into the project
– Small overlapping in the basic understandings may results in
huge communication and negotiation problems which can
be a serious risk for project success
• Partners should have a unique focus and expertise, but all
of them knowledgeable enough about the “whole picture”
Example
• Quality and relevant experience of the individual participants
• Quality of the consortium as a whole (including complementarity, balance)
Partners – roles (STREP)
• Different roles of participants required
– Since we aim at an innovative, still technologically mature set of
deliverables, we need research & development partners in the
consortium
– Since we want to demonstrate the usefulness of the methods
and tools to be developed in real application scenarios, we need
pilot users in the consortium
– Mediator partners (industrial partners) support the end users
in analyzing their current business situations, applying the
technical achievements and methodological procedures in order
to build the pilot systems
– Project management partner brings into the project a huge
amount of experience and capabilities required for the project
management
– Dissemination partner …
Example
How to find a partner?
• Finding suitable partners is key to having a successful
proposal and eventual project
– Make sure you get the best partners, that are well known in Europe
– You must build a European consortium, with partners who fit perfectly
to accomplish the tasks
• It is also the single biggest problem for newcomers to the
Program
– It must be seen as an initial bootstrap process
– Once you are participating in a project, it is much easier to get into
further projects
– Better try to join some proposal than to coordinate it
• You have specific technology and are looking for a suitable proposal
How to find a partner?
•
•
•
•
•
•
Via contacts during existing project (if you have one)
Via your own technical/business contacts
Via CORDIS partner search
Via Ideal-ist Active partner search
Via participation in previous projects
Via contacts at Commission sponsored events or
Information Days
• Via participation in a European Technology Platform
activity
• Most successful searches end up being a
combination of several of the above
Negotiation phase - Outcome
• Stable consortium
– Coordinator is defined
– Roles are distributed
• Stable idea
– Research challenges are defined
– Use cases are determined
• Stable plan for who does what
• Extended abstract that can be sent to preproposal check
Pre-proposal checks
• This service allows a proposer to check on
– the appropriateness of their proposed action and
– the eligibility of the proposal consortium
• There is no element of evaluating the quality of the
scientific content of the proposal by the Commission
services
• The Commission services will only reply to one preproposal per proposal
• Requests for Pre-Proposal checks must be received up
to 4 weeks before the closing dates of the call
• The comments will be sent by e-mail to the applicant
within 5 working days of receipt of the PPC
Writting phase
• Goal: writing the document
based on the given template
• Supported by tools
– Wiki
• Discussion about some specific topic
• Collaborative editing
• Controlled by coordinator
– Agree on a coordinator; give him/her the power to quickly
decide upon pending issues
– Regularly reporting about the progress
•
•
•
•
E-mails
Weakly teleconferences
If needed a face-to-face meeting two months before deadline
If possible a meeting with EC officials after beginning of writing
Fundamentals for writing
• Allocation of tasks and responsibilities
– Who writes what
• Defined by roles
• Agreement about the terminology (and style)
– The proposal must be an easy-to-read document
• Deadlines
– When to deliver
• Iterative approach
– Continuous improvement of the quality
• It can last from several weeks to several months
(in average)
Who write what?
• Use relevant template for writing
• Partners express preferences for writing and
coordinator assigns relevant parts to partners
• Officially proposal is written by all partners
• In practice, it is written by project coordinator
with the support of a few key partners
Who write what - example
– Administrative part
– Technical part
• Start (do collaboratively)
–
–
–
–
–
Define objectives
Define relevance
Define research challenges (pro partner)
Define Work packages structure and leaders
Negotiate
• Contribute (each partner)
– Beyond state of the art for each challenge
– Work package content, including WP tables
• Project management structure (coordinator)
• Impact (dissemination partner)
• Partner data (each partner)
–
–
–
–
Partners profiles
CV‘s
competencies
Individual Exploitation /Dissemination plan
Problems in writing
•
•
•
•
•
•
No input on time
Low quality or too short input
Inconsistent terminology/style
Redundant parts written by different partners
Different direction then agreed
The key is the coordinator
– She/he is responsible for resolving all these issues
Write the perfect proposal
• Your proposal must lay out the science and technology
• But it is also a marketing document
• All proposals are evaluated by experts
– You only get one chance and you must sell your proposal to the
expert who has no time to go in every detail
• Help the expert by telling her/him why your proposal must
be funded
• Be concise und underline key messages with schemes and
graphs
• Be specific and determined: Avoid, "should and could"
formulations
• Be clear and consistent
– make sure all your objectives are consistently described
Taken from: http://www.euresearch.ch/index.php?id=676
When writing your proposal (1)
• Divide your effort over the evaluation criteria
• Many proposers concentrate on the scientific
element, but lose marks on project
implementation or impact description
• Think of the finishing touches which signal quality
work:
–
–
–
–
–
clear language
well-organised contents, following the Part B structure
useful and understandable diagrams
no typos, no inconsistencies, no obvious paste-ins
no numbers which don’t add up, no missing pages …
Taken from: ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/ict/docs/events1-20070226-mckinlay_en.pdf
When writing your proposal (2)
• Make it easy for the evaluators to give you
high marks. Don’t make it hard for them!
• Don’t write too little; cover what is requested
• Don’t write too much
• Don’t leave them to figure out why it’s good,
tell them why it’s good
• Leave nothing to the imagination
Taken from: ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/ict/docs/events1-20070226-mckinlay_en.pdf
Checking phase
• Goal is to ensure the quality of the proposal and to
avoid that some issues are missing
• Minimum five days before deadline
• Ask non-experts to read your proposal
– Objective person to evaluate it against given evaluation
criteria
• Language proof reading
• Style/length check
What should be checked?
1. Does your project address the Work
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
programme?
Is your instrument the right one for the job?
Is your consortium built around the project?
Is your Part B as clear as it can be?
ABC – Ambition, Breakthrough, Critical Mass
Have you addressed the ‘soft’ issues?
Is your proposal over- or under-costed?
How will you manage your consortium?
What does the Commission get out of this?
What should be checked?
•
Pre-evaluation
–
Simulating the evaluation process
•
Evaluation criteria are known in advance
Frequently appearing problems
•
•
•
•
Impact section is weak
State-of-the art is too short
Use cases are too short (not-well described)
Dissemination/Explanation of partners is not
adapted to the proposal (too general)
• Missing content
• Avoid dramatically changing the
content/structure in last days
Submission phase
• Do an early submission three days before
• Dedicate the very last day only for reading by
all partners
– Missing, irrelevant, non-up-to-date content should
be discovered
• Avoid changes in the last minute
EPSS
Electronic Proposal Submission System
• The proposals are in two parts:
– Part A - The Forms
• A1 - General information on the proposal
• A2.1 and A2.2 - Information on the Coordinator and
partners
• A3.1 and A3.2 - Cost breakdown
– Part B - The technical proposal and consortium
details
• The Guide for Applicants identifies the required
contents for Part B
Conclusion
• Proposal creation is a creative, collaborative
coordination-demanding activity
• It requires careful planning and intensive
coordination of the work
• It critically depends on the quality of the idea
and core team
• As always, there might be a person who can
write the whole proposal on her own, but this
is not the right way for doing this
Conclusion – Lessons Learned
• All about knowledge
– Who you know
– Who knows you
– What you know
– When you know
Getting help with your proposal
• Proposers’ days and briefings
• Partner search facilities
– http://cordis.europa.eu/ist/partners/partner.htm
• A supporting website of advice, information and
documentation: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict
• A Helpdesk for proposers’ questions, reachable by
email or phone (and a Helpdesk for electronic proposal
submission)
– [email protected]
• And a network of National Contact Points:
– http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ncp.htm
Thank you!
Leonardo Piccinetti